Given Bush’s continued strong support among Republicans, which is his base, and given the recent evidence of strong political activism for Republicans (remember the high turnout in 2004?), any claim to mediocre or failing support must be regarded as suspect, especially where the demographics have been concealed or are known to be manipulated. This point should be kept in mind, when press releases from partisan sources show up.

The elite media still get away with this kind of treachery because so few people understand the science and art of polling. Polling methods are kept intentionally nebulous to keep the data vague and cryptic enough for use with just about whatever story the media want to tell.

The ideology of the left divides the world into two groups: the powerful and the weak. It is the forgotten legacy of Marx that he rejected notions of good and evil in favor of a morality of power.

The left is unable to make any other moral distinction. Therefore Iraq is good because it is weak and the US/UK are bad because they are strong. Further, any position taken by any powerful country is seen as bad when such position pits weak countries against the strong.

The left around the world hates America because of her strength. America is bad, mmmmkay, because it is strong.

Which is worse, taking a bribe to support the Ba'athists, or supporting the Ba'athists because your worldview is already that warped to begin with?

The press grabbed a collective halo for itself in the Watergate years. They didn't deserve one--Woodward and Bernstein deserved one maybe, but even they had the good sense to be embarrassed and uncomfortable with some of their own methods. The rest of the press shamelessly spent the next three decades trying to ride those coattails, and made themselves look worse and worse and worse all the time. The chickens have come home to roost: these people are despised for a reason, and it's not because some "right wing attack machine" is being mean to them.

China's recent moves, including the threatening of "non-peaceful means" to reunify Taiwan, can only be seen with a sense of wariness in Tokyo, New Delhi, Canberra and Seoul. All of these democratic nations can afford and are expanding their military capabilities. China would be well advised to walk with a softer footprint.

The question then is "Why is China making poor long-term diplomatic choices?" The answer I believe is to keep domestic pressure away from the current government and focused elsewhere.

Military historians and economists alike adhere to the theory that any great power must be able to protect their interests if they are to retain their status in the world. With today’s environment of globalization and the exploitation of foreign markets, this means that they will have to project force. Any other policy is a course towards decline and inevitable insignificance.

...the problem that occurs when a blog becomes a monomaniacal crusade is that you can get a little (or a lot) carried away....

Again, please, perspective. Bolton is not the devil incarnate. He won't bring the wrecking ball to the international system. Or to the United Nations. And there is no plot to dismantle said world body cooked up between neo-Straussians and neo-primitives. Trust me, it will be O.K.

It is fascinating to watch how much political capital the left has been spending to demonize John Bolton, particularly when put into the context of the 2004 American election and Kerry's infamous "global test" comment. Do Democrats not believe in democracy? Do they really not believe that elections matter?

And, finally, what's the deal with Senate Democrats playing the separation of powers (Congress and the President are co-equal branches) card on this issue, with regard to classified documents? As a true believer in strong separation of powers, it's frustrating to see the minority party frame each and every issue in separation of powers terms, as if they speak for the entire Congress-- and get away with it in the elite media.

Romney’s political opponents have in the past reminded voters of the social conservatism of the LDS church. Would they do so again? Not likely in a Republican primary. In a general election, who knows?

If (and it's a huge "if") Mitt Romney wins the GOP nomination, you can bet there will be a not-so-subtle anti-Mormon campaign from the left in the general election. Guaranteed. And the elite media will willingly help them out.

WILLisms.com offers a weekly classiness roundup as a weekly feature, every Tuesday, with 15 blog posts deemed classy. The criteria for submissions: incisive original analysis, quirky topics nobody else is covering, fantastic graphics, or other posts that took a lot of work. We love to spread the word on upcoming blogs, being that WILLisms.com also fits that description. If you would like to nominate a post on your blog or another blog for inclusion, email us at WILLisms@gmail.com. Write "Classy Nomination" in the subject. The deadline is each Monday at 11:59 PM Central Time.